One Company’s New Minimum Wage: $70,000 a Year

[Rasputin_Vol]

He still has to show that they can maintain it long term. But... it's working. Good to see.

At this point, I don't think it would matter. You had people in here saying it wouldn't last 1-3 years. If he does fail, whether its tomorrow, 3 years from now or in 20 years, the reason these people will give is this salary controversy. I couldn't then or now understand how people can cheer against this guy.

 

[BenGrimm]

At this point, I don't think it would matter. You had people in here saying it wouldn't last 1-3 years. If he does fail, whether its tomorrow, 3 years from now or in 20 years, the reason these people will give is this salary controversy. I couldn't then or now understand how people can cheer against this guy.

Because it looked like socialism and that scares people.

 

[BenGrimm]

Out of curiosity I checked checked in to see how this company is doing 5 years after announcing the wage hike.

Still thriving. Acquired another company in Boise, Idaho last fall. Gave them an immediate 10k raise across the board with plan to elevate to the 70k minimum over next 4 years.

CEO who cut his own salary to give out raises extends $70K minimum salary to new employees

Also investing in a coffee shop POS app to help small coffee shops get lower processing fees than Square.

Gravity Payments invests $500K in Joe Coffee to help startup enhance service and take on Square

 

[SCRocket]

Not going to be overnight. Plan is to get everyone in the company at 70k by 2017 I believe is what the article said. 5k a year in raises.

Extreme kudos for this guy. Now the pay off for him is getting good employees coming in. When a position opens up there will be tons of candidates applying for the position. He gets a larger pool to choose from. This also means his employees are way less likely to churn on him. Another win.

Exactly

 

[JCHateSteve]

Because it looked like socialism and that scares people.

How does the owner of a buisness deciding(on his own) to pay his employees better, sound like socialism? How does it relate to government at all?

 

[BenGrimm]

How does the owner of a buisness deciding(on his own) to pay his employees better, sound like socialism? How does it relate to government at all?

Read through the thread and you’ll see the naysayers. When it was first announced conservative news and radio outlets covered it as a soon-to-fail socialist experiment.

In part because the CEO flat out said the decision was made in part as a statement on income inequality. This of course triggered some people.

 

[ButchPlz]

Read through the thread and you’ll see the naysayers. When it was first announced conservative news and radio outlets covered it as a soon-to-fail socialist experiment.

In part because the CEO flat out said the decision was made in part as a statement on income inequality. This of course triggered some people.

Then those people are ignorant. This is the glory of a free (-ish) market to the extreme, and while this guy says it's because of "income inequality" the reality is he's purchasing the (probably) best talent around by paying more for a higher quality supply (the best people).

The problem arises when government mandates certain minimums, which inevitably produces a surplus of supply.

Speaking from my position as a small business owner, the new minimum wage laws that are likely going into effect here in Virginia are absolutely going to stop us from being able to hire for the low-skill retail position we usually fill with high schoolers. We have options like hiring higher skilled, talented people at higher wages to do more in the shop, but our business doesn't make enough to do that right now, and the market doesn't have the desire to absorb some of the costs. On top of that the talent is simply not around here, either.

High minimum wage laws are fine in some places, but it's already a stretch to pay a kid $7.50/hour to manage a cash register. The arbitrary numbers the government keeps setting have almost no bearing on real costs of living and real market desires for anywhere in the country but a very small handful of places.

But it sounds good, so let's just keep buying votes.

 

[JCHateSteve]

Read through the thread and you’ll see the naysayers. When it was first announced conservative news and radio outlets covered it as a soon-to-fail socialist experiment.

In part because the CEO flat out said the decision was made in part as a statement on income inequality. This of course triggered some people.

Some folks seem to think "socialism" means anything I don't like. I honestly can't understand how anyone didn't like this. But politics seems to bring the snowflake out in people. Sigh....

 

[ButchPlz]

Some folks seem to think "socialism" means anything I don't like. I honestly can't understand how anyone didn't like this. But politics seems to bring the snowflake out in people. Sigh....

I'm about as economically 'conservative' as they come, and this bleating of 'socialism!' at a beautiful example of the labor market working is incredibly irritating. How are people bitching about a guy owning his own business paying what he wants to pay any different than the old other side bitching that nobody gets paid enough? They're all about controlling other people either way.

Just let the market work, and let people work in the market.